| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database |
| Date: | 2012-03-06 22:26:29 |
| Message-ID: | 1331072676-sup-7140@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Merlin Moncure's message of mar mar 06 19:07:51 -0300 2012:
>
> On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 4:01 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
> > Why do we need a ticker? Just fetch the time of the task closest in the
> > future, and sleep till that time or a notify arrives (meaning schedule
> > change).
>
> Because that can't be done in userland (at least, not without stored
> procedures) since you'd have to keep an open running transaction while
> sleeping.
I was thinking that the connection would be kept open but no query would
be running. Does this preclude reception of notifies? I mean, you
don't sleep via "SELECT pg_sleep()" but rather a select/poll in the
daemon.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-03-06 22:53:00 | Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2012-03-06 22:07:51 | Re: elegant and effective way for running jobs inside a database |